[archie_struthers]

 


Love the thinking outside the box and the confidence to consider alternative solutions to problems associated with the ball going too far.  In this case , I'm thinking the memories are too vivid , too fun to change some iconic holes.
Tiger hitting wedge into the  par fives in his prime was freaky scary, yet we survived and I still get excited to watch Augusta .


It's not all bomb and certainly not gouge here, as evidenced by some recent winners. In fact , my choice of Spieth this week is solely based on his management skills and because he putts better than anyone in the world right at this moment in time. Won't see a lot of bombers with shaky wedges or putters  in the hunt and you never will.


Let them play 11 from further up , so what if it's easier than it used to be , they still have to respect the pond .

[Jon Wiggett]

Yep...nobody would push back on that at all!?!

Why roll back the ball when the the true best answer is to flat out ignore what the pros shoot?

These guys have to hit cool, difficult shots all the way around the course...the guys that figure it out might be 20 under at weeks end, congratulations and move on...

Jim,

you are naturally quite right and we should ignore what the pros do but unfortunately that is not what happens in the real world and is why we rarely see new courses built at sub 5500 yards and frequently see them at 7000 yards plus. In my opinion, it is the cheapest, easiest and quickest way to combat the evils of both slow play as well as spiralling costs.

Jon

[V. Kmetz]

Several ongoing ANGC threads at the moment and a point that can be made in just about all of them is..........roll-back the ball.....and not just roll it back a wee bit, roll it back a lot.
Atb

I agree (many times) with the principle 100%... but the roll back should be instituted for the championship level...let the general public and manufacturers do what they like; Golf is just about the only significant sport where the recreational crowd (tries to) play(s) with the same equipment the elite championship sector does...even that is a bit of a fallacy because few in the public recreation sector have access to the club tweaks and cutting edge items available in the equipment vans that follow each touring stop.


At the most local levels, play should be thus bifurcated into "anything goes" and the (new, rolled-back) professional standard...a simple matter of entering your scores on one of the two bases. I think such a scheme nearly "doubles" the market for the commercial interests, and keeps the governing bodies from altering classic architecture to produce a score.


cheers
vk

[Kalen Braley]

Every major US sport uses a bifurcated ball scenario..... MLB, NFL, and the NBA all use balls that they don't use at lower levels.  In addition to a plethora of other rule differences.

If ANGC really was interested in doing something for the good of the game, they would do this....

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

.......you are naturally quite right and we should ignore what the pros do but unfortunately that is not what happens in the real world and is why we rarely see new courses built at sub 5500 yards and frequently see them at 7000 yards plus. In my opinion, it is the cheapest, easiest and quickest way to combat the evils of both slow play as well as spiralling costs.

Jon

A. I think the short course movement is gaining momentum.  If not 5500 yards, then max out at 6800, which appeals to the shortest hitting 99.9% of our golfers.  I once played with Tom Watson and was 20 yards behind him, if I played with Bubba Watson today, I would be 100 yards behind.

B. I think the cheapest way to deal with it is to nominate the 100-150 or so courses needed for pro tournaments a year, add length or maintain it.  And then, pass a regulation (or incentive) that the other 14,900 courses in American just don't use the back tees, take them out of service, stop mowing, etc., which would save money.  Adding a new golf ball would just add to cost and confusion.

The whole idea that there needs to be 7K tees because that's what makes a course good, and even when average players want back tees back there, but never actually play them, is the biggest misconception and money waste in golf......

C. And, back on the main topic, just how long would a 100 foot downhill hole have to be lengthened to be a real par 5?  Another 140 yards?  And, the topo doesn't work for that.  Maybe they would have a hole where they open up the front and rear doors of the Eisenhower cabin and require the tee shot to fit through there? LOL

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

As to point 3, I think we already know exactly what they would be faced with.

Keep the tee on 11 exactly at the same spot, but instead of playing to 11 green, play to 12.  It seems very little would need to be done to change this, and would work as is.  So if most players had 180-210 for their second shot into 11...its maybe another 60-70 yards to 12 green by just eyeballing the aerial.  It seems even Bubba would think twice about going at that small of a target from 260-270 out.,...

[Kalen Braley]

My photoshop skills are beyond abysmal...

But for the basic visual concept....consider the following:

1)  Current bunker and green on 11 are converted to fairway and (optionally) trees behind 11 green are removed.
2)  13 tee is new 12 tee, with the new green tucked over against Raes creek for interest/intrigue.
3)  New 13 tee is up near the tree line, set at distance of 280-300ish to make the longer hitters think about giving it a go.  To boot it'd be an excellent short par 4 overall, and hands down the best short 4 on the course as there's only one other at ANGC.

Let the fur fly!! 

[Carl Rogers]

The day this happens, the earth will stop revolving around the sun.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kalen,

If you are taking out the world class 12th, wouldn't you at least extend the 11th to use the 12th green?  I guess I do see the variation of the two back nine par 5's, one with water left, the other water in front, but taking out a good hole just to switch par and length around probably isn't worth it.  I was thinking you push 11 tee way back and do some earthwork.  Then make 12 the de facto par 4, even if you don't use the newest back tees.

But, in general, I take the whole proposal as a joke anyway.

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,

If you are taking out the world class 12th, wouldn't you at least extend the 11th to use the 12th green?  I guess I do see the variation of the two back nine par 5's, one with water left, the other water in front, but taking out a good hole just to switch par and length around probably isn't worth it.  I was thinking you push 11 tee way back and do some earthwork.  Then make 12 the de facto par 4, even if you don't use the newest back tees.

But, in general, I take the whole proposal as a joke anyway.

Jeff,

That's been the assumption since the original post by Mike.  You tee off from 11 tee and play to 12 green as one hole... a par 5.  So outside of converting 11 green and bunker to fairway, and removing a few trees...its pretty much "ready to go" 

[BCowan]

My photoshop skills are beyond abysmal...

But for the basic visual concept....consider the following:

1)  Current bunker and green on 11 are converted to fairway and (optionally) trees behind 11 green are removed.
2)  13 tee is new 12 tee, with the new green tucked over against Raes creek for interest/intrigue.
3)  New 13 tee is up near the tree line, set at distance of 280-300ish to make the longer hitters think about giving it a go.  To boot it'd be an excellent short par 4 overall, and hands down the best short 4 on the course as there's only one other at ANGC.

Let the fur fly!! 

Kalen/Mike,

    This is an epic thread...  I really like the ideas.  13 is a great hole currently but could be a great drive able par 4.  I think the 12th hole is vastly overrated but would make a good par 5 green.  The new 11th hole wouldn't have another pond by the green with a bunker to the right  .   The new proposed 12th hole location could be a world class hole with Rae's creek.  Due to the trees by the current 13th green making it soft, I think it would be better as a drive able par 4.   

I very much dislike the 7th, 11th, 12th, 15th, and 16th holes.  In fact prior to this genius idea i think it would be a better tournament if they played the front nine twice.  I like 18. 

[Mike_Young]

C. And, back on the main topic, just how long would a 100 foot downhill hole have to be lengthened to be a real par 5?  Another 140 yards?  And, the topo doesn't work for that.  Maybe they would have a hole where they open up the front and rear doors of the Eisenhower cabin and require the tee shot to fit through there? LOL

Jeff,  Why would the topo not work?

[Kalen Braley]

C. And, back on the main topic, just how long would a 100 foot downhill hole have to be lengthened to be a real par 5?  Another 140 yards?  And, the topo doesn't work for that.  Maybe they would have a hole where they open up the front and rear doors of the Eisenhower cabin and require the tee shot to fit through there? LOL

Jeff,  Why would the topo not work?

Mike,

I think he said that when he was under the impression that 11 would be converted to a par 5 when playing to 11 green, not to 12 green as the new 11 green.

[Don Jordan]

I like the thinking on this thread  Given how the pros have played it the last few days perhaps the toonamint director could take the sub air up a level and put in some giant fans strategically around the course and behind the 13th green then no need to roll back the ball or move the tee. 

[Bill_McBride]

Yesterday (Thursday) was the first time I have need on the course.  After seeing that hole, I reiterate my previous thoughts on adding 50 yards to #13:   WTF?


The excitement at Augusta is the potential scoring range on 13 and 15 of eagle to double bogey.  The tee shot on 13 has to be a huge hook to get in position to reach the green in two for a crack at eagle.  I've seen the hole on TV for many years but this was my first in person viewing of 13.  The angle of that tee shot, what is it, 110°?   Adding 50 yards for a mandatory lay up, or changing it to a tough par 4, both those options are BS and degrade the thrill of the event. 


I was disappointed that the brisk wind into the players on 15 led most players to lay up.  A few birdies were made by the players who laid up and hit great pitches.  The handful who hit second shots over the pond went over the green or into the right bunker.  A couple went way right and played their pitch shots over patrons' unattended seats!   None of those fellows made birdie, a couple made bogey. 


I would hate to see any change to either 13 or 15, they pretty much exemplify the thrills and agony of Augusta!

[Kalen Braley]

Bill,

If you look at my post above, the bend doesn't even reach 90...I'd put it at about 75 to 80 degrees.

Congrats on your first time there.  I'm still looking forward to a practice round one day myself!!

P.S.  Who knows...maybe by then it'll have the new 11-13 configuration!!   

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,

If you look at my post above, the bend doesn't even reach 90...I'd put it at about 75 to 80 degrees.

Congrats on your first time there.  I'm still looking forward to a practice round one day myself!!

P.S.  Who knows...maybe by then it'll have the new 11-13 configuration!! 

When you get there you will be astonished by how far beyond the 12th green the 13th tee sits.   It certainly looks (and I think plays) more like >90°!  The banking of the fairway is the only thing at Augusta that brings NASCAR to mind!   Well, maybe fried peach pie ice cream sandwiches....

[Matthew Essig]

I think 7 and 17 need better concepts long before 11-13 need alterations.

[Kalen Braley]

I think 7 and 17 need better concepts long before 11-13 need alterations.

Problem is those two holes are pretty locked in space wise....especially 17, it has absolutely nowhere to go.

7 could be lengthened, but that's not what it needs....

[V. Kmetz]

I think 7 and 17 need better concepts long before 11-13 need alterations.

Couldn't agree more and though 10, 11, and 16 have been altered as much or more since the Mackenzie days, #7 just doesn't "feel" right in that current iteration...


even if its too reverent of the Mackenzie course...a bunker-less, nearly drivable hole of some moguls with a Valley of Sin, and near impossible contours to vex pitches and chips, cut to today's standards would feel more like a Masters hole than this does. Even with the classic surrounds and our memory, this feels like Medinah 3, or  Congressional or somethign more than ANGC/Masters does.


***re: 17... few here on in the press mention the loss of the Eisenhower Tree too much, either here or on TV...I did hear Faldo or IBF mention that that they could not believe the hole was as straight as it is, with Ikes tree it "felt" like a slight dogleg left.


cheers
vk

[jeffwarne]

Watching them hit 13 and 15 in. 2 into a 20-30 mph this week tells me another round if lengthening is coming.
Craig Stadler suggested moving 13
GREEN back.
Does this madness ever end?

Change the ball stupid.

[Matthew Petersen]

Love the thinking outside the box and the confidence to consider alternative solutions to problems associated with the ball going too far.  In this case , I'm thinking the memories are too vivid , too fun to change some iconic holes.
Tiger hitting wedge into the  par fives in his prime was freaky scary, yet we survived and I still get excited to watch Augusta .


It's not all bomb and certainly not gouge here, as evidenced by some recent winners. In fact , my choice of Spieth this week is solely based on his management skills and because he putts better than anyone in the world right at this moment in time. Won't see a lot of bombers with shaky wedges or putters  in the hunt and you never will.


Let them play 11 from further up , so what if it's easier than it used to be , they still have to respect the pond .

Archie, I fully agree that 11 is a more interesting hole is you let the guys have shorter clubs in their hands. Then there's at least some temptation to try to hit your second shot at the hole. Right now, it seems like virtually everyone just aims for the front right corner and tries to get up and down.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jim,

.......you are naturally quite right and we should ignore what the pros do but unfortunately that is not what happens in the real world and is why we rarely see new courses built at sub 5500 yards and frequently see them at 7000 yards plus. In my opinion, it is the cheapest, easiest and quickest way to combat the evils of both slow play as well as spiralling costs.

Jon

A. I think the short course movement is gaining momentum.  If not 5500 yards, then max out at 6800, which appeals to the shortest hitting 99.9% of our golfers.  I once played with Tom Watson and was 20 yards behind him, if I played with Bubba Watson today, I would be 100 yards behind.

B. I think the cheapest way to deal with it is to nominate the 100-150 or so courses needed for pro tournaments a year, add length or maintain it.  And then, pass a regulation (or incentive) that the other 14,900 courses in American just don't use the back tees, take them out of service, stop mowing, etc., which would save money.  Adding a new golf ball would just add to cost and confusion.

The whole idea that there needs to be 7K tees because that's what makes a course good, and even when average players want back tees back there, but never actually play them, is the biggest misconception and money waste in golf......

C. And, back on the main topic, just how long would a 100 foot downhill hole have to be lengthened to be a real par 5?  Another 140 yards?  And, the topo doesn't work for that.  Maybe they would have a hole where they open up the front and rear doors of the Eisenhower cabin and require the tee shot to fit through there? LOL

Jeff,

you name dropper  . I agree with you on your post though most players are probably more comfortable at 5800 to 6200 yards with 6800 yards been suited for lower single digits.

Jon

[Steve Salmen]

If 11 were made into a par 5, it would play very similar to 15 with the water fronting the green and the approach shots either coming from the plateau at the top of the hill, or the wedge third from an extreme downhill lie.

[BCowan]

Steve,

There isn't water behind the 12th green, I disagree.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()